CanucksCorner.com Forums

Wonder how often they weigh them..

Everyone has nothing but good things to say about Juolevi, except Macenzzi, in which according to Bloberino is a complete bust.

Boeser, who has been injured all season, is shite accroding to Macenzzi, but everyone with a sound mind disagrees. Konecny will always be a thousand times better than Boeser according to the booze tank. 4 goals and 12 assists for Konecny, WOW! Who has completely cooled off after his hot start.

And yes, the 20 year old Virtanen is a BUST!

I believe 24 teams passed on Pastrnak

micky107 wrote:Wonder how often they weigh them..

Nevermind Arm Curls Macenzzi, he's weirdly obsessed with skinny dudes and chicks with big shoulders.

Blob Mckenzie wrote:Konecny is already playing top 9 minutes on a playoff team.

That's the last fucking time I use wikipedia as my stats reference.

I'm just saying this team would look a fuck of a lot better if he had made different picks in the first round. Skyo and Doc and Dude seem to think the guy is some sort of drafting genius. I don't see it yet. Tryamkin as a 3rd rounder looks good and Demko in the second is a good pick. Virtanen looks like he may top out as a Dale Weise or Jack Skille type guy.

When they drafted Virtanen the overwhelming consensus was that the Canucks needed a scorer with physical punch and speed. Ritchie doesn't have the same speed Jake does, and I suspect that was the deciding factor. Also, consider that when talking about Ritchie, recall that he is playing on a line with Getzlaf and Perry while putting up his points. Virtanen was lucky to see time with Horvat and Baertschi.

The Canucks don't have the veteran talent to put young players with and have them see any kind of success.

Virtanen will get it together, all he has to do is look at a guy like Kass, whom has stopped his crazy partying ways of a rock star - after his car crash and almost losing his career after team and after team tried to get him help.

Kass may not be a cam neely, but a decent 3rd/4th liner.

Virtanen still has a shot to be a top 6 guy at least, he just has to build up muscle and take care of that shoulder he keeps injuring ever since before he got drafted. I still think he'll be Dustin Brown 2.0 guy if he gets his shit together, a swift bulldozer who can pop in 20+ goals, should be a beaut in the playoffs.


Juolevi is the type to take time to be a force, at least another couple years, which is fine as this team is in rebuild mode for awhile, he should be a top pairing dman like Lindholm in Anaheim.

Owns a great combination of size and skating ability for the back end. Has a lot of ability as a shutdown defender, as well as pretty good offensive acumen. Can log huge minutes, in all game situations.

Won't be a high scoring dman, but a valuable top guy you can use in every situation.

Strangelove wrote:Canucks have better odds of signing McDavid to an offer-sheet in 2018

... than they ever had of drafting McDavid in 2015.

(the odds were that small)

You know you're done, give it up...

EDIT: also Sedins' minutes that season were their lowest in 7 seasons and Miller was injured 21 games

... still got 101 points. (Leaves 68, Oilers 62, Coyotes 56, Sabres 54)

Miller still played 45 games. If he was better than Eddie Lack by the degree implied by both his salary and your assertion of the superior degree to which he earned his salary, then many of the games won by Miller would have been lost by the lesser (we must infer) goalie. And again, even had the Canucks not drafted McDavid -- which I agree is always the more likely outcome no matter what place they had finished -- they might have drafted higher. Are you confident that Beoser projects better than all the players taken before him?

In this context (that is, having moved the discussion to “The Great Jim Benning Debate” thread) I feel I should acknowledge that I am aware that the plan I am critiquing is not necessarily Jim Benning’s own. It would be quite some time – if ever – before fans would find out, unless Hockey Widow has some inside information on that score. If Jim Benning manages to win a Stanley Cup through brilliant execution of a flawed plan that was forced on him, I guess that would make him a Super-Genius.

28 gets you 5

Ronning's Ghost wrote: Miller still played 45 games. If he was better than Eddie Lack by the degree implied by both his salary and your assertion of the superior degree to which he earned his salary, then many of the games won by Miller would have been lost by the lesser (we must infer) goalie.

See, this is why geeks shouldn't do acid.

Canucks, goaltending-wise, were one of the worst teams to make the playoffs that year.

Miller had some trouble settling in with his new team... and then battled through injury all year (groin).

Canucks got to 101 points despite their goaltending.

Your plan to go back in time and sabotage Canucks goaltending in a quest for McDavid is ludicrous.

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ... even had the Canucks not drafted McDavid -- which I agree is always the more likely outcome no matter what place they had finished -- they might have drafted higher. Are you confident that Beoser projects better than all the players taken before him?

Finally conceding his McDavid plan was fatally flawed, Ronning's Ghost moves the goalposts.

"Sucking Your Way to the Top" is a horse that was beaten to death long ago in these parts

... but give it a few more mighty wallops if it makes you feel good.

Strangelove wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote: Miller still played 45 games. If he was better than Eddie Lack by the degree implied by both his salary and your assertion of the superior degree to which he earned his salary, then many of the games won by Miller would have been lost by the lesser (we must infer) goalie.

See, this is why geeks shouldn't do acid.

Canucks, goaltending-wise, were one of the worst teams to make the playoffs that year.

Miller had some trouble settling in with his new team... and then battled through injury all year (groin).

Canucks got to 101 points despite their goaltending.

Your plan to go back in time and sabotage Canucks goaltending in a quest for McDavid is ludicrous.

No time travel planned; just a critique of the value of an expensive, quality veteran goaltender to a rebuilding team.

Strangelove wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote: ... even had the Canucks not drafted McDavid -- which I agree is always the more likely outcome no matter what place they had finished -- they might have drafted higher. Are you confident that Beoser projects better than all the players taken before him?

Finally conceding his McDavid plan was fatally flawed, Ronning's Ghost moves the goalposts.

"Sucking Your Way to the Top" is a horse that was beaten to death long ago in these parts

... but give it a few more mighty wallops if it makes you feel good.

McDavid was always an example, not a goalpost. If your mind works better with concrete examples, say 'Eichel' instead.

I know you have long ago dismissed the idea of finishing lower in the standings to improve draft position, but that doesn't mean you have convinced everyone else. You are still left with the fundamental assertion that the quality of Miller's mentorship is of more value than a higher draft pick, while simultaneously asserting that the best attribute of a GM you admire is his skill at the drafting table.

The trouble with the "Cultivate a Culture of Winning" argument is that, even if it were true that a winning culture were of greater value to a franchise than a favourable draft position, for the past two seasons, the Canucks haven't really cultivated a winning culture. (I would further argue that even in the 101 point season, the subsequent playoff performance did little to foster a winning attitude.) That leaves you in the position that either:

a) the GM for whose performance you are advocating has failed / is failing at his stated goal, in which case it is hard to argue that he's doing a good job

or

b) that's not really his goal -- he (or other elements of the ownership management group) just doesn't want to say that they are angling for a high draft position, in which it counterproductive to defend that sham goal when defending the performance of the GM

So which is it ?

.

c. Create a team that works hard, all the while building toward a team that can compete for the Cup (2-3 yrs hence)

Ronning's Ghost wrote: I know you have long ago dismissed the idea of finishing lower in the standings to improve draft position, but that doesn't mean you have convinced everyone else.

Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn about what "everyone else" believes.

Wasn't trying to "convince" anyone in this matter.

YOU however have worked very hard at dragging me into a debate about this.

Ronning's Ghost wrote: You are still left with the fundamental assertion that the quality of Miller's mentorship is of more value than a higher draft pick, while simultaneously asserting that the best attribute of a GM you admire is his skill at the drafting table.

Mentorship is EXTREMELY important in a rebuild IMO + IJBO (Jim Benning's).

And if he's "great at the drafting table"

... well picking higher wouldn't be as much of a concern now would it.

He hasn't proven to be great at the drafting table. More of a myth than anything. Some decent picks in Buffalo and I like Tryamkin so far but he isn't the savant some would have you believe. The Virtanen pick is a major red flag and Pasternak went right after McCann ( by Bennings former team no less ) and is a far superior player.

Strangelove wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote: You are still left with the fundamental assertion that the quality of Miller's mentorship is of more value than a higher draft pick, while simultaneously asserting that the best attribute of a GM you admire is his skill at the drafting table.

Mentorship is EXTREMELY important in a rebuild IMO + IJBO (Jim Benning's).

And if he's "great at the drafting table"

... well picking higher wouldn't be as much of a concern now would it.

I don't think that logically follows. The greater the drafting proficiency, the greater the potential benefit from improved draft positioning, and retaining many draft picks.

Your position seems to be that superior drafting ability would also be able to mitigate unfortunate draft circumstances, which is of course also true, but poor draft circumstances would not optimally exploit the advantage. Even if you think Benning is so good at drafting that he can out draft the other GMs with one hand tied behind his back, why tie one hand behind his back ?

Blob Mckenzie wrote:He hasn't proven to be great at the drafting table. More of a myth than anything. Some decent picks in Buffalo and I like Tryamkin so far but he isn't the savant some would have you believe. The Virtanen pick is a major red flag and Pasternak went right after McCann ( by Bennings former team no less ) and is a far superior player.

Well, and there's that, but for the sake of considering what plan the Canucks should pursue (and originally, how an expensive, high-quality goalie fit into that plan), I was willing to assume that Benning was a drafting savant.

Strangelove wrote:.
c. Create a team that works hard, all the while building toward a team that can compete for the Cup (2-3 yrs hence)

That doesn't really address the axis of "winning culture" (and/or superior mentorship) vs. improved draft position, or whether the Canucks are trying for a winning culture, but failing, or not actually trying for a winning culture, but if you're not interested in talking about that, I'm not trying to manipulate you into anything.

Strangelove wrote:

Ronning's Ghost wrote: I know you have long ago dismissed the idea of finishing lower in the standings to improve draft position, but that doesn't mean you have convinced everyone else.

Wasn't trying to "convince" anyone in this matter.

YOU however have worked very hard at dragging me into a debate about this.

Sorry, didn't mean to waste your time. I just meant that I don't think the horse is dead, in that some people on the board still regard it as an open question. Happy to agree to disagree. The proof the the genius is in the winning. Only too happy to acclaim Benning's genius (and the Great Strangelove's foresight in spotting said genius) if the Canucks win the Stanley Cup under Benning's direction by 2019.

If I understand your position correctly, you and Jim Benning believe that culture and mentorship are bigger factors than draft position and number in building a championship team. I guess we'll see. But if the Oilers (heaven forbid !), or worse, the Maple leaves, win a Stanley Cup before the Canucks, will you acknowledge that as evidence contrary to your position ?

I don't want to interfere with your debate, it's a fun read, but RG, there is one thing that has to come into it.
Demographics. Not all hockey cities are alike or have the same mindset.
Without getting into it too deeply, let's just say metro Vancouver is fickle and definitely impatient.
Not comparable to Toronto or even Edmonton.
It is not really surprising that the message from ownership that trickles down through Linden and Benning seems vague to some.
We are trying to make the playoffs while rebuilding the team. You know, we keep hearing these phrases, and other similar ones, over and over and it may seem like rhetorical nonsense, but; They know the general culture here is impatient, even at times, over sensationalistic.
In short, I think I'll just say we are being kept on a short leash for our own good.

Juolevi 5th overall 2016
Virtanen - 6th overall 2014
Boeser - 24th overall 2015
Demko - 36th overall 2014
Tryamkin - 66th overall 2014
Lockwood - 64th overall 2016
Brisebios 66th overall 2015
Gaudette - 149th - 2015

Craig Button was raving about Gaudette yesterday, says he will be in his next top 50 prospects list and says Boeser is one of the best prospects outside the NHL

McCann and a 2nd got us a 24 year old Gudbranson. A 2nd a a 3rd got Gillis Steve Bernier. Two firsts and Steve Bernier got us Buyout Ballard. I guess we could have traded Barzal and Beauvellier for a Griffin Reinhart instead?

Traded that Gillis pick bum Shinkaruk for 23 year old Granlund.
A 2nd for 24 year old Baertschi

Megamind can turn water into wine

RoyalDude wrote:Juolevi 5th overall 2016
Virtanen - 6th overall 2014
Boeser - 24th overall 2015
Demko - 36th overall 2014
Tryamkin - 66th overall 2014
Lockwood - 64th overall 2016
Brisebios 66th overall 2015
Gaudette - 149th - 2015

Craig Button was raving about Gaudette yesterday, says he will be in his next top 50 prospects list and says Boeser is one of the best prospects outside the NHL

McCann and a 2nd got us a 24 year old Gudbranson. A 2nd a a 3rd got Gillis Steve Bernier. Two firsts and Steve Bernier got us Buyout Ballard. I guess we could have traded Barzal and Beauvellier for a Griffin Reinhart instead?

Traded that Gillis pick bum Shinkaruk for 23 year old Granlund.
A 2nd for 24 year old Baertschi

Megamind can turn water into wine

Tryamkin looks like the best of the bunch